"Those with talent who naturalise today can easily leave the country of adoption for greener pasture tomorrow; it is what these developed countries do to keep them there that really matters.

Between the hard-working stateless man who has spent much of his life toiling on Malaysian soil and the corrupt politician who continues to squander our national wealth, it does not take a genius to distinguish who is the real patriot." By Josh Hong in Malaysiakini

VISITORS

If Malaysian Government had already sent the condolence note to Myanmar,I am sorry for writing this.

If Malaysian Government, GLCs (government Linked companies), NST, TV3, NTV7, RTM and NGOs (esp. government affiliated) had already started a campaign to help Myanmar,please accept myapology for wrongly writing this posting.

We know that we are not Orang Puteh (Whiteman) , no Arab blood and have no Malay-Indonesian blood. We are ALWAYS discriminated in your country.

Never mind if you do not wish to recognize the undocumented workers/migrants and asylum seekers.

During the great disaster in Myanmar, I hope if Malaysian government could do the followings to help us without spending a cent.

Please announce amnesty on all the Myanmar/Burmese undocumented workers/migrants and asylum seekers including those already in the detention camp. (At least if they could work and earn, they could help their families, relatives and friends.)

You could put a time limit for example six months to one year.

It is shameful that you are heartless to continue arresting and some of your agents are harassing them daily.

Dr San Oo Aung

17 Myanmar Illegal Immigrants Held In Kelantan

BERNAMA, RANTAU PANJANG, May 6 (Bernama) — The Anti- Smuggling Unit (UPP) Tuesday arrested 17 Myanmar nationals without valid travel documents in Kampung Kempas, Machang, as they were being smuggled into the country by a syndicate.

Kelantan UPP commander Mazlan Che Hamid said the Myanmar nationals, aged between 16 and 30 years, had been turned over to the Immigration authorities.

He said the van driver, a Malaysian, stopped the vehicle by the roadside and fled after realising that it was being tailed by UPP personnel at 4.30 am.

The UPP personnel had followed the van from Kampung Kedap here, some 40 km from Machang, he said.

Will BN or PR reform the civil service?

Our country seems to have advanced technologically but the mentality of our civil service is still undeveloped. Correct.

Instead of being the people’s servant and being polite when serving the people, they are the ones who start to order the public around failing which the very needs of the public they serve will not be met.

This is also part of the cause for corruption as people who require fast service can’t stand the slowness and inaction on the part of the civil service. Correct, Correct, Correct.

There is an urgent need for a government which can reform our civil service and start to get them to work for the people and not the other way around.

The type of civil service that we have now is one that dumps their service onto the people. The top priority for reform will be the police force. Perhaps the Pakatan Rakyat will be the government that reforms our civil service.

YES or NO?

The CHOISE is yours, Myanmar voters

There are many management theories in the market place to help organisations and individuals improve. I would like to introduce a fundamental theory that is very powerful and easy to apply but often overlooked. I am talking about ‘choice’.

Webster defines choice as, ‘a selection, an alternative, the right or power to choose’.

It comes down to a very simple step – to act or not to act on the choice.

It represents a verb, an action, thereby giving the chooser the power to choose from a selection or if just two, an alternative.

What it ultimately points to is that the power is with you.

To make a choice, we need options.

There are times when we have no options and therefore the choice is automatic.

But in most cases we do have options available to us and I want to work through the deduction process here.

Evaluating options

Now that we have deduced options, what does evaluating our options involve? :

It requires courage and commitment to act on your choice.

This is the ‘locking in’ step in the ‘power of choice’ process.

This is where courage comes in. No matter what the response, I still hold on to my original intent or choice – the courage to stand by my offering and the commitment to follow through with action.

Information or an event is the stimulus that makes us take action. There are various stimuli that present themselves everyday to us. Between the stimulus and our response, lies choice!.

Attitude is our ‘way of being’ or ‘steady state’. Generally, we are all aware of our general attitude towards people and situations. Sometimes due to circumstances, like having a bad day, our attitude could vary from its natural ‘steady state’.

Where information is the stimulus that helps us derive our options, attitude is the component that helps us make the choice from our options. Attitude is therefore an important ingredient in the choices we make. It has a huge impact in making our choice and its consequences.

Making great choices

We have all made unwise choices at some point in our lives.

It is sometimes inevitable,

sometimes intentional,

sometimes regrettable

and sometimes transformational.

Inevitable choices are where the alternative is not a viable option. This is a case where an organisation needs to downsize, assuming all other avenues have been explored. In this instance the best thing one can do is to carry this out in the most humane manner with honesty and integrity.

Intentional choices are where you know that the alternative option is the wisest option, yet you intentionally choose the opposite option. In organisations, this is when we may bypass a certain process or person intentionally for various reasons. Or where we circumvent a certain procedure because we have the power and privilege to do so. Corruption is a classic example of the latter

Regrettable choices are where at the point of making the choice you are ‘aware’ of what the wisest choice is, however your steady state or way of being at that moment stops you from acting on it. These are usually choices made when emotions are running high, where you regret your choice as soon as have you made it or regret the choice as the words have left your mouth.

How many of us have been in this situation in the workplace and personal life? The power is still in the chooser’s hands to undo the wrong and recover the situation.

Transformational choicesare what we should all be aspiring to achieve. In this instance, we take control and are accountable for making great choices. Accountability means taking responsibility for the choices made.

Even if you have made an unwise choice, you are in control to remedy it or to deal with the consequences. It is a big responsibility to be accountable, but one with many rewards when executed.

Learning to make transformational choices gives us the power to be extraordinary, therefore directly impacting you as an individual and the organisation that you represent.

Choice is an active process. It is the difference between a customer continuing to do business with your organisation versus taking their business elsewhere. Use it wisely.

YOGA NESADURAI is founder of O & C Advisory, which focuses on choice as a basis for leadership and organisational development and executive coaching.

My comments and advice to all the Burmese

Yes the choice is yours_

There is a saying in Burmese that:

If you made a wrong choice in trade (wrong choice of cargo) trip you would lose one trip or one time only.

If you made a wrong choice in choosing the husband, you would lose your whole life. (Because usually Burmese practice monogamy and rarely divorce and have another marriage.)

But I wish to seriously remind all of you by adding another phrase_

If you all vote wrongly in the coming referendum,the future history of our country would be gone to dogs.

Sorry for using the harsh words, proverbial jokes and defamatory jibes applied to the dogs. It may be an insult to the dog-world, who are known to love and loyal to its owners.

But Myanmar Military or Tatmadaw do not love its owner Burmese people and is not loyal to its owner, Myanmar Citizens or Pyi Thu in Burmese. Although the dog would be willing to sacrifice its life for the master Myanmar Tatmadaw is always willing to sacrifice its masters for its selfish greed of power.

Be careful, think twice before voting. This is not just an election, which consequence would for one term of government only.

This is the referendum to rubber-stamp the continuous dominance of military dictatorship in Burma/Myanmar forever…

Daw Suu, 88 Generation Students, NLD, Ethnic Minorities and opposition leaders of all the religions and races had sacrificed a lot: in the jail, tortured, some away from home and country and many had sacrificed their lives.

What are you waiting for?

What are you scared of?

Are you not willing to make a minor sacrifice for your country, your race, your religion, your family, your relatives and for your future by taking a small risk of voting NO?

Don’t be intimidated by threats of the SPDC affiliated thugs.

You have shown your courage in 8888 revolution and Saffron Revolution.

This courage to vote is nothing when compare to the above revolutions.

If all the people or most of the people vote NO, what could they do?

Nothing at all!

They cannot arrest, torture or shoot and kill million of voters.

Just say NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! by voting NO in the coming referendum.

May you kindly allow me to refer back YOGA NESADURAI’s advice.

Please courageously make a Transformational choice by voting NO to transform our country from poor military dictatorship to truely progressive democracy.

Transformational choicesare what we should all be aspiring to achieve. In this instance, we take control and are accountable for making great choices. Accountability means taking responsibility for the choices made.

Even if you have made an unwise choice, you are in control to remedy it or to deal with the consequences. It is a big responsibility to be accountable, but one with many rewards when executed.

Learning to make transformational choices gives us the power to be extraordinary, therefore directly impacting you as an individual and the organisation that you represent.

Choice is an active process. It is the difference between a customer continuing to do business with your organisation versus taking their business elsewhere. Use it wisely.

Without mentioning what the demands were, he said the six groups involved in the talks in Switzerland were “trying to internationalise the issue”.

He did not elaborate as to what he meant by “internationalise”, but security officials familiar with the case said the separatists wanted to involve the international community, including the EU and the UN, in the process, to ensure that the Thai side lived up to whatever promises it made.

“I’ve read the demands, and the position of the Thai government is that this is not an international issue. I cannot say at this point in time that we have knowledge of all of the identities of those involved, but we do have considerable information,” Samak said.

Most senior security officials do not agree with the idea of talking to the separatist groups, he said, adding that he would not go so far as calling them “sparrow bandits” like ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra did.

He said he was not in a position to say when the violence in the region would end but insisted the local community stood with the government, because: “The insurgents are killing their own people.”

He pointed to Tuesday morning’s grenade attack on a mosque in Yala as a glaring example of the militants slaughtering fellow Muslims.

Lessons from the southern insurgency

not learned

Last May in Yala, then Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont told a press conference that he had received “positive feedback” from separatist groups over the idea of establishing some sort of “dialogue”.

But he warned that more work had to be done before permanent peace in the Malay-speaking deep South could be achieved.

Kasturi Mahkota, foreign-affairs chief of the Patani United Liberation Organisation (Pulo), immediately welcomed Surayud’s statement. He called it a “positive gesture”.

But on Tuesday in Bangkok, Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej, ruled out the idea of negotiating with the separatists. Local media gave Samak’s statement a great deal of coverage but failed to provide a proper context to this sticky issue.

For as long as anybody can remember, Thai security officials have been going to the Middle East, Europe and neighbouring countries to talk to the leaders of long-standing separatist groups, including the Patani United Liberation Organisation (Pulo), Barisan Revolusi Nasional (BRN) and Barisan Islam Pembebasan (BIPP).

However, the outcomes of these off-and-on chats have failed to have any affect on policy because they are carried out in an ad-hoc manner. They just want to sound out the separatists rather then work towards achieving something more constructive.

“Of course, they all say they are representatives of the Thai government,” said one exiled leader who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Samak said most government agencies disagree with direct negotiations. However, he was tight-lipped about the secret meetings between the two sides while insisting that the government was not going to sit down with the separatists on an equal basis.

Jolted by the weekend car bombs in Pattani and Yala, Samak had to sound uncompromising in public. The veteran politician knows he is dealing with an issue that cannot be easily translated into a quick political victory. Perhaps that is one of the reasons why the premier and his interior chief, Chalerm Yoobamrung, have been side-stepping the issue.

The problem with the Thai security top brass is that,

after years of talking to the separatists,

their attitude has not changed.

They see themselves as “negotiating with bandits”

rather than being in a “dialogue with fellow citizens” –

people who embrace a different political ideology, as the communist insurgents did two decades ago.

The only thing that successive Thai administrations have agreed upon is that the issue should not be internationalised.

In other words, no foreign governments or international organisations should be involved in mediating the talks or be allowed to snoop around the deep South,

where allegations of gross human rights violations

and questionable security practices are rife.

Thailand looks at East Timor and Aceh and tells itself that this is not what it wants.

The problem with the Thai generals is that they think like Thai politicians.

They all want the violence to end under their watch.

Never mind that the problem is_

deeply rooted in history

and shaped by mistrust

and the resistance of southern Muslims to Thailand’s policy of assimilation.

Another problem is that the old guard – older members of the separatist groups – don’t and, in most cases, can’t control the new generation of militants on the ground.

Locally known as juwae, the new generation of insurgents do not necessarily identify with the old guard, and they engage in the kind of brutality unheard of by the previous generation. They are organised in cell clusters but have the capacity to coordinate attacks – 100 targets at a time – throughout the region.

Even after years of being on the receiving end of this battle, the government is still unable to fine-tune a number of important initiatives. At a recent Thai Journalists’ Association seminar in Pattani, the provincial Task Force commander, Major General Thawatchai Samutsakorn, said the “government can’t tell me what they [insurgents] will get if they surrender”.

Often, a suspect who surrenders is_

paraded in front of the media,

unable to speak freely,

while top officials tell the public how the suspect has come to his senses after being misled by some false religious teaching

and distorted history.

And afterwards, when released, the “reformed” militant becomes a target of his former comrades.

Nearly 3,000 people have been killed in the insurgency since it began in January 2004.

Ethnic and Religious

Minority Groups of Burma

raging in those regions where principles and practices which could reconcile the diverse instincts and aspirations of mankind have been_

ignored,

repressed

or distorted….

Diversity and dissent need not inhibit the emergence of strong, stable societies,

but inflexibility, narrowness and unadulterated materialism can prevent healthy growth.

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, 1991 Nobel Peace Prize winner.

Burma is one of the most ethnically diverse countries in the world. This reflects its strategic position between the borders of modern-day Bangladesh, India, Tibet, China, Laos and Thailand.

Throughout history settlers from many different ethnic backgrounds have migrated across the great horseshoe of mountains which surround the central Irrawaddy river-plain.

Today ethnic minority groups are estimated to make up at least one third of Burma’s population of 45 million and to inhabit half the land area. The 1974 constitution (which is now being revised) demarcated seven ethnic minority states – the Chin, Kachin, Karen, Kayah (formerly Karenni), Mon, Rakhine (or Arakan) and Shan – and seven divisions, which are largely inhabited by the majority Burman population. Such a map, however, is a political simplification. Over 100 different dialects and languages have been identified in Burma, and many unique ethnic cultures have survived late into the 20th century. These vary from the Kayan (Padaung) on the Shan/Karenni borders, where the ‘long-necked’ women wear extraordinary brass necklaces, to the Salum sea-gypsies of sub-tropical Tenasserim and the once head-hunting Naga along the India frontier. The State Law and Order Restoration Council, which has ruled Burma since 1988, itself refers to the ‘135 national races’ of Burma, but has produced no reliable data or list of names. In general, the different ethnic sub-groups in Burma have been loosely simplified by anthropologists and linguists into four main families: the Tibeto-Burmese, Mon-Khmer, Shan (or Tai) and Karen.

Under General Ne Win’s Burma Socialist Programme Party government (1962-1988), ethnic minority languages were openly downgraded and a tacit policy of ethnic, cultural and religious assimilation was instituted by the state.

A theory was developed of the ‘Burmese family of races’ -a family sharing one blood and historic origin. This view still continues and was summarised by the SLORC/SPDC chairman, Sr General Than Shwe, on the 46th anniversary of Burma’s Union Day on 12 February 1993:

“In the Union of Myanmar where national races are residing, the culture, traditions and customs, language and social systems may appear to be different, but in essence they are all based on the common blood of Union Kinship and Union Spirit like a hundred fruits from a common stem… There can be no doubt whatsoever of the fact that our national races have lived together unitedly in the Union of Myanmar since time immemorial.”

Clinging firmly to the policy of Burman chauvinism, they muffle the basic birth rights of the indigenous races and absorb them of their cultures and traditions. Despite their shoutings of national unity, they ignore the equality of races.

In the present political climate, any substantial redrawing of Burma’s borders is unlikely. But several ethnic groups are found on both sides of the land frontiers surrounding Burma: notably,

the Chin (Mizo) and Naga are also present in India;

the Kachin, Wa and Shan in China;

the Karen, Mon and Shan in Thailand;

and the Buddhist Rakhine and ‘Rohingya’ Muslims in Bangladesh.

The smaller hill communities of the Lahu, Akha and Lisu are even divided across four modern-day borders, being split between Burma, China, Laos and Thailand.

Only the Naga are represented by cross-border political movements of any significance, but the importance of inter-ethnic ties should not be underestimated. The idea, put forward by governments in Rangoon, that Burma is a homogenous island that can be successfully isolated from the outside world is a Burman-centric view which most other ethnic groups reject. It is also a view which has been a major impediment to the natural development of local economic and cultural ties between indigenous peoples on both sides of post-colonial borders.

Far from being a peripheral frontier problem, the ethnic minority crisis is one of the most central issues facing Burma and its neighbours today. All the regions along Burma’s 4,016-mile-long land border are inhabited by ethnic minorities, often with historic ties in neighbouring states, and armed ethnic opposition groups still police many of Burma’s frontier crossings and trade routes.

Historical Background

The Mon and their distant hill cousins the Wa and Palaung in Shan State are usually described as the earliest inhabitants with descendants in Burma today.

Ethnic Karen and Chin were probably the next to move down into central Burma

before Burman migration accelerated into Upper Burma in the 9th and 10th centuries AD.

Ethnic Shans also began migrating into south-east Asia at around the same time,

followed by different Tibeto-Burmese hill peoples,

including the Kachin and Lahu.

In general,

hill-dwellers, such as the Chin and Kachin, practised slash-and-burn cultivation,

while those who settled in the valleys and plains, notably Burman, Mon, Shan and Rakhine, formed larger communities where they turned to sedentary wet-rice farming.

There were many wars and political power changed hands frequently. Only in the late 18th century was the Burman ruler Alaunghpaya able to achieve control over most of the territories which subsequently came to constitute British Burma.

Nevertheless, despite these wars, there was cultural and ethnic inter­change throughout the centuries. This raises serious doubts over the wisdom, or indeed the relevance, of interpreting Burma’s history too literally in racial or nationalist terms. Many local communities and societies in Burma have, historically, been multi-ethnic. This suggests that there are many important precedents for inter-ethnic tolerance and understanding which could be drawn upon to reach a new consensus today.

During the British Colonial times, the ethnic minority Frontier Areas, in contrast, were governed quite separately from Ministerial Burma and, for the most part, left under the control of traditional rulers and chiefs.

Much to the resentment of the Burman majority, the Karen, Kachin and Chin were also preferred for recruitment into the colonial armed forces, and ethnic regiments were formed.

While Burma’s national liberation movement, led by Aung San, at first fought on the Japanese side, most minority peoples, including the Karen, Kachin and Muslims, stayed loyal to the British.

As a result, there were many bloody communal clashes and retaliatory killings during the war in which the minorities, for the most part, came off very much the worse.

Ethnic minority leaders have frequently said that the war massacres made them resolve to take up arms after independence if their political demands were not met.

As a symbol of equality and voluntary union, Aung San famously promised: “If Burma receives one kyat, you will also get one kyat.” But the Karen, Mon, Rakhine and several other ethnic minority groups were not represented and, amidst many other errors, were critically overlooked by both the British and the coalition Anti-Fascist People’s Freedom League (AFPFL), which was to form Burma’s first independent government. Following elections to a Constituent Assembly, these principles were incorporated into the constitution of September 1947, which was federalist in principle. The new constitution instituted a bicameral legislature, with a Chamber of Nationalities and a Chamber of Deputies. On ethnic rights, however, it was riddled with anomalies. The Shan and Karenni were awarded the voluntary right of secession after a 10-year trial period, whereas the Mon and Rakhine ended up without even a state of their own. And while in the Karenni and Shan States the traditional royal Sawbwa or rulers were allowed to retain their near-feudal rights, the complex rules of representation determined that ethnic Burmans would predominate in both houses of parliament. Equally inconsistently, the much-promised Karen State remained undemarcated, and, right up until independence, arguments continued over the different merits of ‘nationality states’, ‘communal seats’ in parliament and special ‘ethnic minority rights’.6 As a gesture of conciliation, the figurehead positions in the new Union were shared on an ethnic basis in keeping with Aung San’s philosophy of ‘Unity in Diversity’ (see box). After U Nu, a Burman, was elected as prime minister, Sao Shwe Thaike, a Shan, and Smith Dun, a Karen, were appointed as president and army chief-of-staff respectively. But such measures came too late. By the end of 1947 the KNU and several other nationality parties were already boycotting the political process. Across the country storm clouds were clearly gathering with many ethnic Burmans, especially in the communist movement and the army, equally unhappy about the AFPFL government of U Nu. Burma’s independence was born out of bloodshed. The country’s second-largest political party, the Communist Party of Burma (CPB), went underground in March 1948, and the KNU followed at the beginning of 1949. In quick succession, many ethnic Burman and Karen units in the army mutinied in sympathy, reducing government authority at one stage to just six miles out of Rangoon. AFPFL reasserted urban control, but throughout the late 1940s and 50s various other ethnic groups, including the Karenni, Mon, Pao, Rakhine and Muslim Mujahids, took up arms in the countryside.

Akbar the Great

Vs

Than Shwe the Megalomaniac

We heard about the various rumours regarding the deteriorating mental health of the Bawa Shin Min Tayergyi Sr General Than Shwe and construction defects of buildings in Myanmar’s new administrative capital of Naypyidaw.

I suddenly have a de’ javu feeling about the similarities between the WHITE ELEPHANT CAPITAL’S of Akbar the Great’s Fatehpur Sikri and Than Shwe the Megalomaniac’s Naypyidaw.

Naypyidaw remains an architectural wonder in the forest with its gleaming, sometimes partially-completed buildings and bridges. A mega-project during Myanmar Military’s days of wasteful projects performed while the ordinary people have no rice to eat.

It is evocative of the great Mogul emperor’s Akbar’s deserted capital of Fatehpur Sikri.

Fatehpur Sikri is a city located 40km west of Agra, in the state of Uttar Pradesh and was the political capital of India’s Mogul Empire under Akbar from 1571 – 1585 AD. Akbar the Great was the Greatest King of India who was famous for the respect of other religions, Hindu, Christian, Jain etc and had started an Interfaith Dialogue. He had even went to the extent of trying to amalgamate the different faiths into one.

But Than Shwe was a Megalomaniacand worship the barrel of his gun more than Buddha’s statues and Monks. He showed the world that he love his power more than his religion. No wonder his sins are threatening his consciousness and causing the deterioration of his mental health.

“If you slaughter the monks and those calling for democracy, when your regime falls, and it will fall, you will be pursued to every corner of the globe like the Nazi criminals before you,”

News of Than Shwe’s mental illness started circulating in the Internet. It is widely accepted that Than Shwe has suffered from “stress” according to the Chinese authorites who visited him recently.

Internet blogger Moe Thee Zun reported recently citing the internal sources, Than Shwe became depressed after the collapse of the support of the Buddha’s Statue in his home. He became more nervous and anxious after witnessing the death of 28 Coconut Trees, which were planted as Yadayar to avoid the bad omen by the advice of His Sooth Sayers.

According to Irrawady news, excerpt of his ill health is as follows_

“One source told The Irrawaddy that Than Shwe had been depressed by a report by the head of the United Nations Development Programme in Burma, Charles Petrie, who was expelled from Burma recently. The report highlighted the junta’s economic failures and mismanagement.

Capital Fatehpur Sikricity shared its imperial duties as a capital city with Agra and is regarded as Emperor Akbar’s crowning architectural legacy.

Construction of the new ceremonial capital, with its numerous palaces, halls, formal courtyards, reflecting pools, harems, tombs and a number of mosques satisfy his creative and aesthetic impulses, typical of Mughals. Fatehpur Sikri is a World Heritage Site.

And most of the people of Burma rightly expects that after the demise of the supreme dictator Senior General ThanShwe after the “Mad Cow disease” or “Rabies”, Naypyidaw would follow the same fate but could not become a World Heritage Site but the Myanmar’s Wastage Site.

A large number of masons and stone carvers worked hard for15 years on the construction of the Fatehpur Sikri city the size of which was larger than modern-day London. It served as the capital of his powerful kingdom for twelve years (1571-1585) and was unexpectedly deserted soon after the work was completed apparently because of the need of sufficient water supply.

Akbar did not settle in this splendid capital for long and reasons for leaving Fatehpur Sikri are as much secrecy as was its building. There are a lot of rumors as to the reason Akbar built the city at the chosen site by the Sikri Ridge. The name of the place came after Mughal Emperor Babar defeated Ranga Sanga in a battle at a place called Sikri (about 40 KM from Agra). Then Mughal Emperor Akbar wanted to make Fatehpur Sikri his head quarters. So he built this majestic fort. But due to shortage of water he had to ultimately move his HQ to Agra Fort.

Akbar had no child. After the blessing of Sufi Saint Salim Chisti he was blessed with a male child who became the heir to his throne, he was named Salim (after the name of Sufi Saint Salim) who later become Emperor Jahangir.

But its site could have been chosen more for its tactical site which lies on the highway between North and South India, and was of strategic value to control the huge Mogul Empire.

The magnificence of the city is greatly enhanced by the mosque which was the first structure to be built in the whole compound. The roomy courtyard added attraction and could accommodate ten thousand men at prayer. Akbar is reputed to have been so inspired by the atmosphere that he wept and gave a call for prayer or the ‘azan’ himself.

Naypyidaw was built to accommodate and centralise all of the Myanmar government’s administrative duties and is located 300km north of Yangon, near Pyinmanar.

The SPDC government wasted a substantial amount of money to build this defense intended military HQ city probably financed by Myanmar’s scarce revenue which in retrospect could have been better utilized for education and health.

Naypyidaw is seen by most of the visitors as a desperately barren city. One of the reasons for its apparent bleakness is the absence of adequate, convenient and reliable public transport from Yangon, Mandalay or from nearby Pyinmanar.

The Military Junta’s civil engineersbuilt highways but possibly due to economic reasons or corruption, failed to put in the quality and had just concentrated on quantity only. Unlike Singapore which plans and builds MRT lines and stations decades ahead of actual development, Naypyidaw’s planners blundered by building the city first and worrying about public transport later.

This blunder could prove critical as Naypyidaw stands harshly quiet as the world passes by. Military planners didn’t foresee the fact that the usage of cars, the prices of which were already beyond the per capita income of the average Myanmars, were further handicapped by rising costs of petrol, maintenance and tolls ensuring the reduction of private transport utilization.

Foreign diplomats refuse to shift their residence to Naypyidaw.

We hope that soon after the demise of the Great Megalomaniac HRH Than Shwe, successor General Maung Aye, who is from Mandalay and had already built a second new capital in May Myo, now called Pyin Oo Lwin. It is very near Mandalay, roads are excellent in Myanmar standard. After all it was the summer capital of British Colonial Government. So Naypyidaw is going to face the fate of Fatehpur Sikri.

Naypyidaw, as in Fatehpur Sikri, lies in risk of being entrapped in the words of Reginald Lane-Poole [(1857–1939) a British historian, archaeologist and orientalist, born in London on the 27th of January 1832.]_

‘Nothing sadder or more beautiful exists in India (for Naypyidaw case, Myanmar) than this deserted city, the silent witness of a vanished dream !

of the Great Burmese Poet.

Posted on December 13, 2007 by Sit Mone

The Pyinma* Stump(Pyinma Ngote Toh)
Gnarled, grotesque and vulture like
Old Pyinma stump assumes an ugly sight
It stands alone on the mound height.
Its branching point has an old hole
Scab around it has hardened and old
It was eaten by white ants galore.
Near the mound bank the soil is parched
A soldier’s helmet and a dry cloth dummy perched
It points […]